1.03 is very slow in comparison to 1.02

Recommended Posts

On my second partition (172 GB, 50% full) I have about 60 GB of mp3s (=small files). While Defraggler 1.02 wasn't exactly fast in defragmenting these files, it did a reasonably good job. 1.03, on the other hand, is drastically slower. A single mp3 file is processed for 20 or more seconds, and during defragmentation of these files, HDD hardly even blinks (you can't even tell, that defragmentation is in progress!). The result is, that, while 1.02 defragmented that particular drive in about 30 minutes, 1.03 takes 3 hours and more.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

On my second partition (172 GB, 50% full) I have about 60 GB of mp3s (=small files). While Defraggler 1.02 wasn't exactly fast in defragmenting these files, it did a reasonably good job. 1.03, on the other hand, is drastically slower. A single mp3 file is processed for 20 or more seconds, and during defragmentation of these files, HDD hardly even blinks (you can't even tell, that defragmentation is in progress!). The result is, that, while 1.02 defragmented that particular drive in about 30 minutes, 1.03 takes 3 hours and more.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I just upgraded from a beta version (.9.???) that ran fine on my 200gb drive (XP). If I had minimal fragmentation, it would run VERY fast. For example, when I defragged after a few hours of another defrag, I might have a hundred files with, say, 500 fragments. In that case, it might take less than a minute to defrag the files after "Analysis." The same circumstance now takes HOURS. Even after I analyze the drive before defragging, ".094" seems to go through every directory on the drive.

I have looked for a setting to tweak without success. Is this a known issue? I see that others are running more slowly than under earlier non-beta versions. But I don't have a sense of whether the underlying structure of Version 1.03 has changed so much since Version .9 to know whether to expect a loss of speed of the magnitude I have experienced. If so, I may abandon Defraggler for a speedier tool. It has gone from my fastest defragging tool to my slowest.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

...Good news indeed, for those for whom 1.03.094 was slow [thanks due to MrRon &Piriform].

I am intrigued, though, that that version only appears to have been slow for some people [possibly a minority?] and not for others. I for one used this version on both a Pentium 4 machine with XP SP2 and a mere 40G disk, and an Athlon 64 x2 with Vista Home Premium and twin 280GB disks and found it to be just as fast as before, if not more so on both machines.

So, now that a fix has been found, the problem must have been identified; was it something that can be explained on the forum [please] for the more technically curious amongst us ?